Twice Weekly Isoniazid and Rifampin Treatment of Latent Tuberculosis Infection in Canadian Plains Aborigines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Six months of twice weekly directly observed isoniazid and rifam-picin treatment of latent tuberculosis (TB) infection was implemented to improve the outcome of treatment. A total of 591 infected aborigines without previous tuberculosis or treatment of latent TB infection received twice weekly isoniazid and rifampicin for 6 mo from 1992 to 1995. The outcome was compared with 403 infected aborigines without previous tuberculosis or treatment of latent TB infection who received self-administered isoniazid daily for 1 yr from 1986 to 1989. Of patients, 487 (82%) completed the twice weekly 6-mo regimen compared with 77 (19%) who completed the daily 12-mo regimen. The main reason for incomplete treatment was default. Both groups were followed over a 6-yr period. The rate of tuberculosis in the twice-weekly isoniazid and rifampicin-treated patients was 0.9/1,000 patient-years compared with 9/1,000 patient-years in the daily isoniazid-treated patients. The rate of side effects was higher for directly observed treatment patients, 136/1,000 patient-years of drugs, compared with 39/ 1,000 patient-years for self-administered treatment patients. Life-threatening side effects such as skin allergic reactions and hepatitis were the same in both groups. A regimen of 52 doses of directly observed twice weekly isoniazid and rifampicin is an effective and well-tolerated regimen to improve the outcome of the treatment of latent tuberculosis infection in a population with a high rate of default with daily self-administered isoniazid.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".